On Fri, 17 Feb 2006, Scott Russell wrote:
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
Patch didn't apply cleanly on the version of Net_IMAP I have (1.0.3), but I
manually applied it, and all appears to work great ... thx :)
That's odd as I developed it on Net_IMAP 1.0.3. Chances are I botched the
diff, did you
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
Patch didn't apply cleanly on the version of Net_IMAP I have (1.0.3),
but I manually applied it, and all appears to work great ... thx :)
That's odd as I developed it on Net_IMAP 1.0.3. Chances are I botched
the diff, did you have the failed output?
--
Scott Russell <
On Tue, 14 Feb 2006, Scott Russell wrote:
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
So, it would be passing:
SETQUOTA "user.cotton" (STORAGE none)
to the backend ... again, if none == an integer #, the quota gets set, so
it looks like the syntax itself is right, but 'none' is wrong ...
Is anyone doing this
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
So, it would be passing:
SETQUOTA "user.cotton" (STORAGE none)
to the backend ... again, if none == an integer #, the quota gets set,
so it looks like the syntax itself is right, but 'none' is wrong ...
Is anyone doing this with PHP that has gotten around the above is
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
So, it would be passing:
SETQUOTA "user.cotton" (STORAGE none)
to the backend ... again, if none == an integer #, the quota gets set,
so it looks like the syntax itself is right, but 'none' is wrong ...
Is anyone doing this with PHP that has gotten around the above is
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
So, it would be passing:
SETQUOTA "user.cotton" (STORAGE none)
to the backend ... again, if none == an integer #, the quota gets set,
so it looks like the syntax itself is right, but 'none' is wrong ...
Is anyone doing this with PHP that has gotten around the above is
